Pager

[Rick Stockton]

My comment is at the bottom..

On 02/13/2013 10:12 AM, Mark wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Rick Stockton
> <rickstockton at reno-computerhelp.com> wrote:
>> On 02/13/2013 06:51 AM, Mark wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Aaron J. Seigo <aseigo at kde.org> wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 15:59:36 Mark wrote:
>>>>> I understand your reasoning, but i don't think you should do this. In
>>>>> my opinion a plasmoid - and certainly one that's on the panel - should
>>>>> never be invisible but still take up room.
>>>> i think we can all agree that an empty space is a bug that needs to be fixed.
>>>>
>>>> so, on to the question of "should we have a pager at all", "should the pager
>>>> hide itself when it shows one desktop", etc.
>>>>
>>>> some people use multiple virtual desktops (vd). some people don't. in fact,
>>>> the default is not to. with the default, the first group of people add more
>>>> desktops as one of the first things they do.
>>>>
>>>> for the overwhelming majority of those with one vd, having a pager is worse
>>>> than useless, it is downright confusing and takes up space on the panel. so
>>>> we'd like to not show a pager for those people.
>>>>
>>>> for those who do .. it's a bit annoying to then also suggest that they have to
>>>> add a pager to their panel if they want one. how magical would it be if it
>>>> just appeared? this is simply a way to give people more comfort and less to
>>>> complain about.
>>>>
>>>> not everyone who uses multiple VDs enjoys or needs a pager. they can remove it
>>>> easily. (this is important to what follows ...)
>>>>
>>>> so .. how can that accomplished? we could add a pager on demand when the
>>>> number of desktops changes. however, this would mean tracking this probably in
>>>> the containment .. and then it would need to know where to put it .. and we'd
>>>> need a way to override this behaviour for distros that want something
>>>> different.
>>>>
>>>> it would also need to be smart enough to know that if it already put one there
>>>> and the user removed it once before, don't add it again.
>>>>
>>>> it's all pretty complex. it also breaks the concept of components in plasma
>>>> and couples (even if loosely) the containment (or whatever component watches
>>>> this) to the pager applet.
>>>>
>>>> well, we could go ALL OUT and add an event based scripting system so that when
>>>> a given event happens a given script is run. we'd have to define (and trigger)
>>>> various events (e.g. "more virtual desktops") and we'd have to have a way to
>>>> match up scripts with triggers ... and .. it's a whole hell of a lot of work
>>>> (and would need to be maintained) for one small feature.
>>>>
>>>> but there's a pragmatic solution:
>>>>
>>>>         hide the fucking thing when there is only one vd.
>>>>
>>>> this covers the "i've removed it once, don't want it back" use case. it covers
>>>> swapping between 1 and 2+ VDs. it respects component lines.
>>>>
>>>> so .. we now have the problem of "i only have one virtual desktop, but i want
>>>> to add a pager". with the current pragmatic solution this isn't possible. i
>>>> can imagine a few approaches to this:
>>>>
>>>> * hide the pager applet in the chooser when there is only 1 VD. this isn't
>>>> great as it means if you have only 1 VD you don't get a pager ever. it also
>>>> means lots of instrumentation in the chooser (and probably more stuff in the
>>>> applet .desktop files) to make this happen. -1
>>>>
>>>> * put a configuration option in the pager which controls the "hide when VD ==
>>>> 1" behaviour. this could be a hidden config value defaulting to off, allowing it
>>>> to be used by the default panel script .. or it could be in the UI, making it
>>>> easy to set whenever.
>>>>
>>>> personally, i lean towards hidden config. if you want a pager that's always
>>>> visible, just add one.
>> Please let me understand how the hidden config gets set:
>>
>> (1) hidden in a .kde/share/config file, which must be hand-edited to
>> assure Pager's presence in the panel if VD is set to only one. Or;
>>
>> (2) the value is automatically changed ("single vd pager = on", or
>> whatever ...) by the User Action of explicitly pulling Pager Applet from
>> the Applet Chooser and placing it on the Panel, without regard to the
>> number of VD at that moment.
>>
>> I think that #2 is better: ui configuration files should generally be
>> set by User Actions. Until pulled into the Panel, setting this parameter
>> value, the 'Pager' should be automatically removed if VD is reduced to
>> 1, or if VD defaults to 1. I think that 'System Settings' is sufficient
>> for changing the number of VDs when Pager is not visible. (Option: The
>> VD configuration menu items could also be added into the desktop item,
>> too... the number of submenus and menu items which are now present in
>> the desktop menu is quite small.)
>>
>> I agree with Aaron, we should not even insist that the Pager be visible
>> in the case of VD > 1. So, we perhaps need another config parameter to
>> remember that choice (or, a single tri-value parameter). We should
>> provide a pair of checkboxes to set/unset the property(s) value
>> explicitly, too. (Because KDE is know for being MORE configurable and
>> customize-able, in comparison to another DE. Not LESS configurable.)
>>
>>
>> ** now back to quoting Aaron **
>>
>> Mark's use case of "display is off, i need a pager" would also be covered in
>> this case .. though that use case is also one that should be fixed properly in
>> the window manager (Martin G. already noted that). i'd also suggest that with
>> present windows and the tasks widget, there are other ways of getting to that
>> functionality as well. otherwise, the pager's feature goals do not include "i
>> wonder where my windows are when i turn off random displays", so there is no
>> reason to optimize the common case / defaults for this.Maps
>>
>>
>> there are some useful lessons in this, and i hope those who have participated
>> in the lengthy discussion in this thread will pick some of them out :)
>>
>> so .. who'll write the patch for the pager?
>>
>> ** Now back to quoting Mark **
>>
>>> That's a lengthy reply :)
>>>
>>> But now i'm a bit puzzled as top which patches are needed..
>>> First of all, you also agree that taking up the space and not filling
>>> it in with anything should be fixed. But you also say that showing the
>>> pager with one VD should not be the case. And because that is the
>>> default i'm guessing the first step is to get the pager out of the
>>> default setup.
>>>
>>> Then on to the fixing part. If you remove the pager from the default
>>> setup there is only one other way to get the pager. Adding it
>>> explicitly! So then the question becomes: if the user adds it
>>> explicitly, should the pager "just" be visible? Regardless of the
>>> number of VD's? Because if that's the case (which it seems) then there
>>> is no need in adding a hidden config. Then it's just a matter of
>>> removing that one "visible: ..." line.
>>>
>> We do need that config parameter somewhere: Otherwise, User adding a
>> pager (explicitly, and failing to set a config parameter) will find the
>> Pager "hidden" upon his/her next Login.
>> Repeating myself, I would to like to see an explicit UI checkboxes,
>> controlling whether "Pager shall be Hidden when number of Virtual
>> Desktops = 1", and whether "Pager shall be Hidden when number of
>> Viretual Desktops > 1".
>>
>> I can't do the patch, because I can't even spell "QML". But I wanted to
>> follow the instructions to "pick out some of the lessons", and offer a
>> UI proposal (with one or two controlling config variables), which, I
>> think, can satisfy all possible preferences. Thanks for reading!
> This is getting confusing since 2 threads will now talk about one subject..
> Anyway, your post sums it up nicely and doesn't have my completely
> misspelled and ill typed "pager" (as "places") in the title though it
> refers to it.
>
> So about your suggestion.
> You basically want something like:
> - Dropdown where you choose:
> - - Always show pager
> - - Show pager when X VD's are present
> - If the the second option is selected, a number input thingy appears
> in which you can specify when to show the pager (1 VD, 2 VD's, 3
> VD's...)
>
> Right?
>

First: Sorry about the creation of 2 (now 3) Topics. I simply found
"Places" to be an utterly confusing word for the topic under discussion.

Now: You are 99% right about by recommendation. But my feeling is: Two
checkboxes seems to be "more friendly" than a multi-valued integer
parameter, and I really recommend doing it that way:

"Pager shall be Visible, even if only one Virtual Desktop is defined"  
     [checkbox]
"Pager shall be Visible, when the number of Virtual Desktops is  > 1"   
[checkbox]

This could be used to allow an enhanced Pager, in a future Plasma, to be
Shown on one (or more) VD instances... while not present on others. It
could also, right away, be used to suppress the definition of Multiple
Pagers on a single panel. That is: if one Pager is already present, but
INVISIBLE, and the User adds a second Pager to the same Panel - do not
actually add it. Instead, Just make the existing one Visible, with both
of the "Pager shall be Visible" values re-set to "on" (checked).

My argument against the integer is this question: Is the count of
persons who will REALLY, REALLY want the Pager to appear when activating
at least 4 VDs (but not 2, and not 3) greater than a dozen, in the whole
world of KDE Users? I don't think it is. And so, the use of a "minimum
VD count", may possible values, is (probably) too much complication, and
very likely to be considered "a bug, not a feature" when Users increase
their number of Act VDs.